The passive smoking "debate"

[one_dreamy_girl]

With the institution of a ban of indoor smoking in all public buildings imminent, the risks of passive smoking have become topical for discussion. Last night I found myself yelling at someone in frustration after he’d made a comment along the lines of “There haven’t been many conclusive studies linking passive smoking with disease

Comments

[sgtbiffo]

I'm not about to deny that there is any arguement against said problems involved in passive smoking. For me I find it some what bemusing that there is a move towards it at the present moment. It seems to be a classic example of the problems inherint in democracy for two reasons.

1. That there is a ban in buildings that are now designated soley for the consumption of alcohol.

2. On the list of social problems, smoking in the pubs is really far down on the list, yet its getting preferencial treatment over far greater concerns at the moment.

One great arugement for the ban is all the problems and costs involved in healthcare of smokers.

I don't drive. Cars are a major contributer to climate change, which is a far greater concern that will effect far more people than smoking ever will. And I'm not talking about freight. 30% of green house gases are contributed by industry. The other 70% is produced by private citizens primarily by their cars.

Lets look at the billions of dollars the set-up and maintainence of roads cost. The cost of health care for people mangled in accidents. The ongoing costs of those irrecoverably injured in road trauma.

Yet I don't drive. Does this preceedent of the smoking ban give me a sound basis for agitation for the banning of cars? Do people really need private cars or is it just a luxury? How did people in the last 9,900 years of human history get by without them? Is the use of private cars impacting on my health and well being.

What other things are of greater concern; weath distribution, human rights, resource management, education... I mean how long could I make this list. It really does feel like society is trying to work from the bottom of the pile up. A problem all to often encountered in democracy.

So it's this bullshit little storm in a tea cup about designation of areas for drug consumption. I can buy alcohol at a fucking hairdressers but can't smoke at a venue that's set up for getting drunk...??? My Grandfather had a great terminology for this type of thinking; "Arse-about"!

(Reply to this)

[sgtbiffo]

Though some may argue other wise, retail and cuisine are not known for their narcotic effects. This is why I didn't really touch on this area of arguement.

I think that the need to enforce a ban in pubs and nightclubs by law instead of choice (which are to very differnet things look at legalisation of marajuana for example) shows the publics and proprietors want for such restrictions.

Just because its in vogue doesn't mean every one wants to do it. Restriction of choice is a restriction of personal freedom.

[one_dreamy_girl]

And staff are the most at risk because they are in a smoky environment many days/night in the week, not only Friday and Saturday night. The staff do not have the option of foregoing frequenting the club/pub, even if they tried to be selective about the jobs they took, as they simply wouldn't be able to find work.

[sgtbiffo]

"I think your argument is crazy."

What that there is far more important issues facing our society and its this pissant little one thats got a massive advertising buget at the moment?

*puts on a Napolean costume* Whee, gibber, rant- Lock me up!

[sgtbiffo]

If you still think I'm crazy and don't get it; read the first thing I wrote.

And yes I find it amusing that there recently passed bill that allows for the sale of alcohol (a drug that is a factor in over 90% of all violent crime and is the root cause of homelessness above and beyond vagancy caused by tobacco) in hair dressers, book shops and Ikea, yet there is a push to stop smoking where you get pissed.

As I said there are far, far greater concerns in our society than were you smoke a durri!

[one_dreamy_girl]

Only 16% of Melbourne-folk smoke, so it's hardly the majority that are against the smoking ban. The government is SUPPOSED to help the population by legislation. For example, harking back to some of your previous comments, banning drink-driving and speeding may not be to everyone's liking, but it WILL save lives. While not all legislation is in the public's best interest, this IS, at least from a health point of view - even smokers are harmfully effected by passive smoking.

[sgtbiffo]

The car thing was more about global warming displacing billions of people and flooding most of the arible land across the globe, but where you light up being more of a growing concern.